Other is the status quo, which works fine for us.
But the status quo is never a realistic option in this sport because there's no centralized control and one actor or another is trying to squeeze the last possible dollar from it.
Cracks in the B1G?
- Thread starter twojman
- Start date
But the status quo is never a realistic option in this sport because there's no centralized control and one actor or another is trying to squeeze the last possible dollar from it.
Not inherently, but college football has constantly changed when it didn't need to just because someone figured out a way to get more money for themselves.
It’s possible but it depends on what happens in the next 5 years with the ACC.
Purdue founded the Big 10. Isn’t the role of Iowa to bow down to the king?
So you are saying....
Iowa is Purdue's Little Bro...
And
Iowa stole/copied Purdue's Black...
Oof rough....
Actually they aren’t.
If they were serious about maximizing dollars they would band together and really hit the TV partners.
There is no reason why the NBA makes vastly more with their TV package.
This is all about the top dogs making a lot more than others, even if it means everybody makes a lot less.
Even a lesser share would be more than what we are getting now, or will be in the future. It will never happen, so I am not sure why people are even talking about it. EIU will never allow ISU into the B10 and will do everything in the power to make sure it never happens. They understand that if money is taken out of the equation, that they have few advantages over ISU and putting them on an equal playing field money wise weakens them going forward. Iowa is a smaller rural state, and unlike most of the states around us, we have two major state schools, while those around us for the most part only have one. So all the fund raising and resources go to that one main school. In the 80s, the BOR wanted to destroy both ISU and UNI, making ISU sell off WOI when ISU was the only school that owned a top 100 market TV station to train people in broadcasting. It would be like forcing EIU to do away with their dental program, and was only done because EIU did not have one and they wanted to hurt ISU. At the time, ISU along with Missouri and Syracuse were the best broadcast journalism schools in the country, and all of that disappeared
My advisor was Jack Shelley. And a fellow student is play by play for the Bears
I actually think this is an important point.
Sure the level of play in the Big Ten West wasn't competitive with the East but it made geographic sense and was the closest thing to a 'traditional' conference that was left in college football.
Exactly. If Iowa State was part of something like the Big 10 west, probably most of the road trips would have been as doable as during the Big 8.
In 2005, Iowa players traveled 1,300 miles to 5 away games.
In 2025, Iowa players will travel 3,253 miles to 5 away games.
All Big 10 presidents voted for this.
In 2025, Iowa players will travel 3,253 miles to 5 away games.
All Big 10 presidents voted for this.
And Iowa would vote in favor of it again
It only matters how the top 3 or 4 think about being in the BIG in name only.
Do those schools want even more for traveling like this? Do they want more because they’re so often playing at noon because they’re the top draw?
I looked into this recently. From 2012-2023, Iowa played Michigan seven times and Ohio State three times, for an average of 0.8 games per season against those top two Big 10 teams. Even if you throw in Penn State too (eight times), Iowa still only averaged 1.5 games per season against those three top teams. This is wild: they had a period of nearly three full calendar years, from November 23, 2023 to November 5, 2016, where they didn't play a single one of these three teams! Their record in those games was 5-13.
Meanwhile in the Big 12 you were playing both Texas and Oklahoma every year unless you were Texas or Oklahoma. We went 6-18 against them in those years (5-11 under CMC).
To be fair during that period Michigan was a mid tier team. But extremely valid point
Round robin schedule in the previous Big 12 definitely made for a tough conference slate. Gotta feel good to not have that anymore.
In your time window of 2012-2023 you didn't include Wisconsin, and those were some of their best seasons. From 2013-2019 Wisco won 9, 11, 10, 11, 13, 8, and 10 games, had two top-10 finishes, four top-15 finishes. Iowa played them every year.
Last edited:
And unlike the Big 12, when the Big 10 was actually 10 teams, they didn’t have a round robin, I forgot about that. And every game was a P4. Iowa in 1974 played UCLA, Penn State and USC for non conference. The only Big 10 team they didn’t play was Indiana. Future Iowa State coach Dan McCarney was a captain for that Iowa team.
About same for Iowa State except round robin for conference. During that year, Iowa State’s non conference slate was Texas Tech, Washington and BYU. The only non P4 was New Mexico.
This is why Kirk Ferentz’ record should come with an asterisk.
Last edited:
I think the point is, ISU schedule was tougher than Iowas for years, and very few Iowa fans acknowledge that, when comparing the two. Now its flipped and Iowa fans are trashing Iowa State for their SOS, even though in reality it still is similar to Iowas.
What many still fail to acknowledge is Iowas SOS is still not that high and Iowa States is basically even with them, and their schedules have basically balanced out, at least according to ESPN.
I know ESPN is not perfect for any of this, but its the readily available one and I dont feel like looking deeper.
They rate:
Iowas overall SOS at 80
ISUs Overall SOS at 82
Iowas SOR is 89
ISUs SOR is 11
Iowas Remaining SOS is 9
ISUs Remaining SOS is 48
Now looking at the schedules I think the numbers are low for Iowa overall, but I have a feeling their 2 noncons against teams that barely have a pulse are bringing them down, and am not sure their protected games are helping much.
But my point still stands that Iowas schedule is similar to what ISU had for years, and ISUs is more in line with what Iowa had.
